Carbon Offset Project Faces Scrutiny Over Land Rights, Consent and Alleged Intimidation

A large-scale carbon offset project in Sierra Leone is facing growing scrutiny amid concerns over land governance, community consent processes, and alleged intimidation of human rights defenders, raising wider questions about transparency in global climate finance initiatives.

The project, led by Canadian-British firm Carbon Done Right, aims to reforest approximately 57,000 hectares of land to generate carbon credits for international markets, including potential corporate buyers such as BP. Project documentation was reportedly supported by Swiss consultancy Ecosecurities and submitted to Verra, the world’s largest carbon credit certification body.

Civil society organisations, including the Sierra Leone Network on the Right to Food (SiLNoRF) in partnership with Swiss Church Aid (HEKS), have raised concerns over compliance with national land laws and international human rights standards.

Following field research conducted across 25 villages affected by the project, SiLNoRF and HEKS published a 2024 report questioning the legality of land acquisition processes, the adequacy of Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC), and the transparency of contractual arrangements.

The report, later cited in international media including Le Temps, warned that large-scale carbon schemes risk placing pressure on customary land systems in rural communities where land remains central to livelihoods and food security.

Shortly before the report’s publication, SiLNoRF staff reportedly faced increasing pressure linked to their field investigations, including a formal complaint allegedly filed against members of the research team. Public reporting further suggested diplomatic engagement was required to prevent possible intimidation of human rights defenders.

Tensions escalated when British investigative journalist Olivia Acland, working with Source Material and The Times, reportedly received letters attributed to two local chiefs. The letters accused HEKS and SiLNoRF of spreading misinformation and bribing landowners.

However, questions have been raised about the authenticity of the correspondence, with concerns over how the documents were transmitted. Reports indicate the letters were routed through the project company before reaching the journalist, rather than being directly delivered to SiLNoRF or HEKS.

SiLNoRF has also pointed to inconsistencies in language, formatting, and signatures, noting that one chief reportedly does not communicate in English and typically signs documents using a fingerprint. The second chief’s health condition has also been cited as raising further doubts about authorship. No legal determination has yet been made regarding the authenticity of the documents.

Independent reporting by Olivia Acland further suggested that Carbon Done Right did not hold signed land contracts covering the full 57,000 hectares referenced in publicly available project materials. The company has disputed aspects of the reporting.

Carbon Done Right has denied allegations that it orchestrated campaigns against civil society organisations, stating it only responded to media inquiries. It also claimed that negative publicity has affected its planned London IPO. Despite these responses, questions surrounding documentation, consent procedures, and transparency remain unresolved.

SiLNoRF has reported that staff working in affected communities were subjected to threats and intimidation, including warnings allegedly directed at family members. Civil society groups warn that such conditions place human rights defenders at significant risk, particularly in land-related disputes involving high-value international investments.

The organisation has reiterated that the protection of human rights defenders must be central to any climate or development intervention.

The carbon offset initiative remains under review by Verra, while BP has reportedly withdrawn from participation in the project. Meanwhile, HEKS staff member Silva Lieberherr was awarded the Bai Bureh Service Delivery Award 2025 for contributions to service delivery initiatives.

SiLNoRF’s has clarified that it supports climate action but insists that climate finance must not undermine land rights or displace rural communities.

The organisation is calling for stronger safeguards, including full transparency in carbon land agreements, independent verification of Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC), enhanced protections within carbon certification systems, and stronger mechanisms to safeguard community advocates and civil society actors.

As scrutiny continues, the case underscores growing tensions between global climate finance ambitions and local land governance realities in Sierra Leone.